Book Review: The Women Who Flew For Hitler, Clare Mulley

This superb book tells the highly engaging stories of two quite different German female aviators, both of whose youth and professional adult lives were lived out as test pilots under Hitler's Nazi regime. 

Both devoted patriots, Hannah Reitsch, the younger of the two, whilst never a party member, was an ardent supporter of Hitler and his whole Third Reich project, albeit in denial re the Holocaust. Melitta von Stauffenberg, a few years older, was, by contrast, of partially Jewish ancestry, and married into the family of aristocrats who famously came closest to assassinating the Führer. 

This is an excellently written work, weaving the two ladies' lives - both very exciting, interesting and unusual - into the fabric of truly momentous times. Fascinating, moving, highly informative. Just all round excellent, giving a different and very refreshing perspective on an oft-visited era.

Film Review: The Admiral, 2011

It's interesting to see a modern Japanese take on aspects of their history in WWII. Western renderings of this theatre of war range from the film's made during the war itself, usually propagandistic, via postwar epics like Midway, to more recent films, such as the HBO miniseries Pacific, the much criticised Pearl Harbour, or Clint Eastwood's attempt at a balanced view (Flags of our Father's and Letters From Iwo Jima), of varied quality and historical veracity/evenhandedness.

The real Yamamoto.

This depiction of Admiral Yamamoto casts him, and the leadership of the Japanese navy as a whole, as the doves amongst the otherwise mostly hawkish Japanese military. Western audiences might find this surprising, in the light of Pearl Harbour, famously described by Roosevelt as a 'day that will live in infamy'. But those who've read on the subject will know that there is indeed some truth in this. I can't recall from my own readings whether or not it's true, as depicted here, that the Japanese navy had been tricked into believing a declaration of war had been made prior to the attack.

I did enjoy this film, but it did seem rather hagiographic, casting Yamamoto as an ever-smiling and sagacious leader, a reluctant warrior, borne aloft on the waves of jingoistic militarism that sped Japan towards its ultimately cataclysmic fate. Still, it's fascinating to see the Japanese telling their own story. An impressive production overall, as well. But there were some less than brilliant CGI moments, a pet-hate of mine.

Not brilliant, but interesting, and worth seeing.

Film Review: Battle For Sevastopol, 2016

This Russo-Ukrainian film (originally titled Indestructible) tells the fascinating story of Lyudmila Pavlichenko, a young lady who became a famous Russian sniper, and her experiences in the battle for Sevastopol in WWII.

Yulia Peresild as Lyudmila Pavlichenko.

The real Pavlichenko.

In the field.

Based on a real story, this rendering utilises the relationship between Lyudmila and Eleanor Roosevelt as a means to frame the narrative. Pavlichenko (Yulia Peresild) and Roosevelt (Joan Blackham) are both superbly performed, and this aspect of the story is refreshingly even-handed, politically, remaining more about common humanity than divisive ideology.

The film is well written, directed, and performed, and even my pet hate of CGI (which can render modern films rather like PlayStation games) was put aside and disarmed. The story deftly balances grim gritty combat with aspects of Ukrainian/Russian life that range from the domestic to the academic, and even beach-life! And through the Roosevelt connection the story even goes Stateside. There's a great scene in which Woody Guthrie serenades Lyudmila; '...fell by your gun, fell by your gun, 300 fascists, fell by your gun'!

Visiting the U.S.

There are several love interest threads.

Including one with Masha, her instructor.

Overall I thought this was a terrific film. It does veer a little towards Hollywood mainstream style in places - mainly through the exploration of Pavlichenko's rather tortured love life - but thankfully remains sufficiently indigenous to not fall into dumb cliché too deeply or too often.

I found it rather strange to watch a film showing snipers - some, like Lyudmila, being female - enjoying having their bloody fun, for example bagging a brace of 'krauts' as the latter celebrate Christmas, and couldn't help thinking it was all rather awful.

This aspect of the subject is, I think, fairly subtly handled in the film; one particularly shocking scene shows a very young blonde Russian (or Ukrainian?) girl, at a kind of afternoon soirée, reciting a virulently hate-filled anti-Fascist poem, exhorting her adult audience to mercilessly butcher their Nazi enemy.

The young girl acts her part brilliantly, with appalling conviction! The contrast between her youthful beauty and the ugliness of what she is saying is superbly expressed in her face. Very powerful!

CGI is used heavily in places. Particularly in the parallel thread ... 

... about Pavlichenko's pal and her aviator boyfriend/fiancé 

Their was really only one aspect of the production that marred this film for me: two appallingly schmaltzy Euro-tastic power-pop ballads, which sit in the film like - pardon the expression - two turds in an otherwise delicious dish. But, those songs apart, this is an interesting, informative, entertaining, thought-provoking and even occasionally moving film. Definitely worth seeing.

Book Review: Nelson vs. Napoleon, Christopher Lee

I didn't enjoy this as much as Trafalgar, the Nelson Touch, by David Howarth, but it was still well worth reading, and pretty good really.

The title's a good eye-catcher. But a bit misleading. It's more (eager) Nelson versus (reluctant) Villeneuve, than Nelson vs. Napoleon. Of course Bonaparte figures large, as he did in so much of the history of the era that bears his name, and is taken to task by Lee for meddling outside his area of expertise, and, Canute like, failing to understand the ungovernable nature of the seas. 

Villeneuve.

Like Napoleon, Lee gives Villeneuve a good drubbing, portraying him as a whining vacillating poseur, who wanted the trappings of high naval office, but for whom the pantaloons just didn't fit. Or, rather he filled them, but not in quite the way Napoleon had hoped for. To his credit, Lee does say that Villeneuve, once battle was joined, was not as craven as he had been at the Battle of the Nile. And he gives the French and Spanish navies due credit for hard fighting on the day. Well, on the whole... Villeneuve's second in command welshes on him during the battle, scarpering for Cadiz. Lee suggests that had he not done so, the Combined Fleet might've won the day. 

The death of Nelson, aboard Victory.

As many familiar with this subject will know, there are, quite apart from the British tragedy of losing Nelson - and it's gently suggested here that Nelson may have been playing to the gallery, deliberately courting a death-wish - some ironies on the Franco-Spanish side, which Lee addresses: firstly Villeneuve was being relieved of his command (knowledge of this impending demotion/usurpation may have caused him to finally engage Nelson), and secondly, Napoleon had in fact already turned his focus and his Grande Armée eastwards, to deal with Austria, giving up on his cross-channel invasion plans. Thus making the battle at Trafalgar an unnecessary waste.

John Bull taking a Luncheon, Gillray.

Lee's writing style is eminently readable, and his scholarship appears to be pretty thorough. I did, however, feel that there was rather too much repetition of certain ideas, and that 'The Long Haul To Trafalgar' might not have needed to be quite so long. Still, in tracing back the tale to its roots and filling out the back story, you do get a clearer, fuller picture, which is good. 

I read the paperback version, which I was lucky enough to pick up for just £2 at a local 'Alladin's Cave' type second-hand store in Ely. As well as the text, there's a picture section, with portraits of the main protagonists, and some invasion scare and naval battle scenes, etc. One very strange omission, to my mind, especially given that this book benefits from both a glossary and 'cast list' (useful things many such books omit), is the total absence of any maps showing the battle of Trafalgar itself.

Something similar to this would've been nice/useful.

So, not perfect, but very good nonetheless, and well worth reading if this subject is your jug of grog.

Christopher Lee? No... not that Christopher Lee...

... this Christopher Lee!

Book Review: Hitler & Churchill, Secrets of Leadership - Andrew Roberts

Subtitled 'Secrets of Leadership', this book grew, I believe, out of a radio programme of the same title Roberts produced for the BBC. It's an excellent book: an easy yet compelling read, in just over 200 pages Roberts uses that old 'compare and contrast' m.o. to examine these two Titans of 20th C. history.

Both Hitler and Churchill...

... liked wearing military uniforms.

This is the first of Roberts' books I've read in which his Tory position is made quite so plain, as he refers very disparagingly to liberals and the left, and their ideas, in a manner bordering at times on glib. Interestingly, however, whilst he's still an ardent Tory, Roberts' views on some issues appear to have evolved since this was written (2003); if you'd only read this book, you might find his later book Napoleon the Great somewhat surprising.

However, if the above sound like the potential criticisms they indeed are, nevertheless, this book remains an excellent and by and large very balanced examination of its complex, fascinating and difficult subjects. And what compelling subjects they are!

Both were powerful orators, capable of inspiring...

... who knew the power and drama of rhetoric.

Having said this, there is a slight (other reviews I've read prefer to say an extreme) imbalance, and in more than one way, in that the book not only gives Churchill more column space, ending with a study on how he's been perceived since his passing, but also falls in step with the vast majority of post WWII literature on the two men, in its fulsome praise of Churchill and sometimes crowing dismissals of Hitler.

But when the case is argued as eloquently and convincingly as Roberts does here, it's hard to disagree. And, in broad brushstroke terms, I personally don't. Nor is this book purely or simply Churchill hagiography vs Hitler as fall-guy punchbag. The failings of the former, and the strengths of the latter are examined.

Both understood the power ...

... of simple propaganda.

Roberts says very early in his book that he separates Hitler and Churchill by describing the former as a charismatic leader, and the latter as inspirational. To learn what what he means by that might require that you read this book. I'd highly recommend that you do.

A fascinating polemic which, despite not sharing the authors' politics, I thoroughly enjoyed reading.

Book Review - Larrey, Surgeon to Napoleon's Imperial Guard: Robert Richardson

"The most virtuous man that I have known." Napoleon, in his bequest to Larrey.

Napoleonic warfare, for all the martial splendour of the peacock uniforms, was a sanguine business. As armies, battles, and wars became ever larger, so did the 'butcher's bill', particularly as the role of massed artillery grew, pitching flesh and bone against shot and shell.

It seems unsurprising now that at some point in the 19th Century the colloquial term sawbones came into use to describe surgeons. It's perhaps only surprising that the term seems to have originated after the Napoleonic wars, as it quite literally describes one of the most common  medical battlefield operations of that bloody era.

Larrey in action on the battlefield.

Larrey conducts operations in a 'casualty evacuation' station near the front.

The career and life story of Dominique Jean Larrey is backlit by these epic convulsions of 'military glory, that attractive rainbow, that rises in showers of blood' [1]. Indeed, Larrey was constantly up to his elbows in the gore of Napoleonic battlefields, frequently working, as in the upper of the two paintings above, on the field of battle itself, a fact also colourfully attested to in several passages in this excellent book. [2]

Larrey, as painted by Girodet.

The young lion, sporting his distinctive long, curly mane!

But the battles themselves were, in a manner of speaking, only half the battle. Not only did Larrey and his historic and innovative flying ambulance service daily brave death on the battlefield, seeking to restore life where others sought to take it. But they also had to contend with a military administration that treated them with barely credible contempt, rather as the casualties of war were themselves largely treated. A nuisance and inconvenience, an irritating distraction, or even obstruction, to the job in hand.

Larrey at work at Borodino, by LeJeune.

When a horse trod on a wounded man on the field of Borodino, one of Napoleon's entourage said words to the effect of, 'never mind, it's only a Russian', Napoleon famously replying 'on the field of victory there are no longer enemies, only men.' 

Whilst this, and Napoleon's interest in the medical services themselves (both generally and in his adoption of Larrey's initiatives) redound to his credit [3], sadly the norm was generally more in line with the original callous comment. Injured soldiers more often than not ceased to be treated humanely. They had, in fact, become less than men.

Richard Robertson, himself a doctor and medical man, has written a fascinating account of Larrey's life. The story is especially good because Larrey's career maps the whole period. Born just a few years before Bonaparte, his career in military medicine began some years before he first met his future emperor. That first meeting occurred at Toulon in 1794, prior to the young general's dizzying ascent to pre-eminence.

Although Larrey's memoirs include material on his pre-Bonaparte adventures, Richardson, having given a sketch of his background and early career, only really starts to get properly stuck in with the expedition to Egypt. From thereon in Larrey marches with the Guard, almost always near his emperors' side, through many campaigns, right up to Waterloo. 

From Egypt and the Holy Land, through the patchwork of German states and nations, to Poland and Russia, Larrey was there. And his main enemies throughout all this were not the enemies of France, per se, nor even the damage wrought by war, but disease and the administration. 

Larrey got the idea for flying ambulances from the impressive manoeuvrability of French horse artillery.

One criticism often levelled at Napoleon is that he didn't allow his subordinates enough independence. Well, I won't enter into that debate here as regards his military deputies. But it's clear that Larrey always stood by his principles, and would do so even if it brought him into conflict with vested interests. This was a big part of why his fascinating and inspiring passage through life was a rather stormy one. [4]

The Ambulance Volante predates Haynes manuals.

Surgery was his expertise, and both he and the French as a whole led the field in terms of successful battlefield surgery. The tales herein of the contrast between the old methods and the improvements of Larrey and others both chill and quicken the blood! In terms of the survival rate after amputations, the innovations of Frenchmen, Larrey amongst them, were demonstrably superior to older traditions. Nevertheless, adoption of new and better techniques proceeded with painful slowness, military medicine being a very conservative field. 

In addition to his famous flying ambulances, and his intense and principled dedication to seeing medical services better administered and provided for, another of Larrey's great contributions, once again related to his strict principles of always doing the right thing (and yet another that could potentially ruffle feathers), was his method of seeing patients in order not of rank or status, but the severity of their needs. 

A modern reproduction.

But if coping with appalling battlefield injuries was tough, dealing with disease was even tougher, as they fought an invisible and unknown enemy. Indeed, Larrey would himself come dangerously near death's door, contracting typhus at the tail end of the 1814 campaign. And whatever the practical medical issues were, there was always the administrative system to fight as well. Medical staff didn't hold military rank, and consequently were at the mercy of the often corrupt commissariat.

Napoleon was notably quicker to professionalise and militarise the army trains, which had formerly been a separate civilian adjunct. He did also eventually look to do something for the medical  corps, but it was too little, too late. French military medical services were not, in fact, to be properly organised until the closing stages of WWI! [5]

Larrey, immortalised on a stamp.

And a chocolate box! [6]

As well as having the grand sweep of the entire period, there's plenty of anecdotal detail: from the occasion on the campaign in Egypt and Syria, when Larrey operates on an Arab entertainer and his pet monkey, bringing tears of gratitude from the former and frequent scampering, leaping hugs from the latter; to the time he saves the life of Blücher's son, during the 1813 campaign, an act that found the inveterate enemy of France saving the surgeon's life in turn, when he was wounded and made prisoner after Waterloo.

Larrey did achieve fame and recognition in his lifetime, but it was a rough ride, and he was frequently sorely tried. Not just by the campaigning itself, but by rivalries, and fortunes that fluctuated between such highs as being made a Baron, given a home, and at several times being either honoured or  otherwise rewarded, to being passed over, intrigued against, not getting paid his dues, or - quite incredibly - being billed for the loss of equipment in Russia! [7]

Larrey's rather fetching artist wife, 'Laville'.

A rather poor image, but good in that it shows an ambulance and numerous medics in action.

Fortunately for all of us, like many in Napoleon's orbit, Larrey kept a journal, which he published, in part, during the Napoleonic era itself. His correspondence also survives, much of it having wound up in the Wellcome Institute archives. From these and other sources Richardson has assembled a vivid and moving account of a truly remarkable life, lead by a truly remarkable man.

Larrey was frequently called away from the wife (see above pic) and children he loved and treasured, to far-flung places where he carried out a very virtuous and very challenging occupation, often for precious little thanks, and frequently in great personal danger. But despite seeing so many others die on campaign, including such brave warriors and close personal friends as Desaix, Lannes and Duroc, Larrey himself was destined to outlive the adored imperial master whose friendship, respect and benevolence he earned.

Another view of the two wheeled ambulance.

A larger four-wheeled ambulance. This an illustration, I believe, for a Historex model.

And unlike the unfortunate Marshal Ney, Larrey even managed to weather the two monarchical restorations, although after the second his prospects were, for a while, rather shaky. But his fortunes would rally several times in later years. 

After Waterloo he could easily have moved abroad - folk in high places, from the ruler of Brazil to the Czar of Russia, offered him prestigious posts - but he preferred to stay in France, where he lived long enough to see Napoleon return one final time, to the mausoleum of Les Invalides.

The way Larrey's story ends - I won't spoil it by giving it away - is typical of his life, embodying action, principle, duty, etc. And like his whole life story, it's also really quite moving. 

A really excellent and thoroughly enjoyable read. Highly recommended.

----------
An English translation of Larrey's memories can be read here

NOTES: 

[1] Abraham Lincoln.

[2] One of the best involves a shell going off directly overhead as Larrey is at work. He doesnt even look up! With miraculous good fortune, nobody is injured, but Larrey's hat is peppered with holes

[3] Some of these anecdotes very much run counter to the 'black legend' of his callousness, so assiduously cultivated by his enemies.

[4] There's an excellent story told here about how he saved 48 soldiers with hand wounds - who stand accused of inflicting them upon themselves and are sentenced to death - daring to stand up to all those, right up to the Emperor, who are keen to make an example of these unfortunates. 

[5] A British surgeon who tried to persuade Wellington of the benefits of Larrey's innovations, the flying ambalance in particular, found even shorter shrift than Larrey did in France!

[6] It's interesting that the Larrey on the stamp is the younger, fitter man, whilst the Larrey on the chocolate box, undoubted benefactor of mankind that he was, is the later more corpulent Larrey!

[7] The scenario was complex and tortured: Larrey's pay was significantly in arrears, and it appears that those with power in the administration decided that billing Larrey for the losses in military medical equipment that occurred in Russia, during the ill-fated 1812 campaign, would allow them not only to save on paying him, but to get money from him. Bloody typical pen-pushing, money-grubbing bureaucrats. Leeches!